NBC caves to the Clinton Nazi's!

[Mike]

Ron Dunlap, neither party leaves much to chose from do they?

 

[Rich]

Care to point out any inaccuracies? It's been thoroughly checked and researched and nothing was proven to be untrue. Obviously things have to be condensed to make it TV presentable but the information is correct.

There are many. But here is what members of the 9/11 Commission have said:

9/11 Commissioners Criticize ‘The Path to 9/11′
ABC continues to advertise “The Path to 9/11″ as “based on the 9/11 Commission report.”


The people who wrote the 9/11 Commission report disagree. Here’s a review of their comments —

9/11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick:

“I do have a problem if you make claims that the program is based upon the findings of the 9/11 Commission Report when the actors, scenes and statements in the series are not found in — and, indeed, are contradicted by — our findings.”

9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste:

Some scenes in the film “complete fiction. … The mischaracterizations tended to support the notion that the president [Clinton] was not attentive to anti-terrorism concerns. That was the opposite from what the 9/11 commission found.” [Link]

9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer:

In the scene, CIA operatives have Osama bin Laden cornered and are poised to capture or kill him until National Security Adviser Samuel Berger refuses to give the go-ahead. … [M]embers of the 9/11 Commission say none of that ever happened.

ROEMER: There were plans, not an operation in place. Secondly, Osama bin Laden was never in somebody’s sights. Thirdly, on page 114 of our report we say George Tenet took responsibility for pulling the plug on that particular Tarnak Farms operation. [CNN, 9/7/06]

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey:

“If you’re saying this is based on the 9/11 Commission report, there are substantial factual discrepancies. You need to get [them] out. … You can’t sit there as ABC and say, ‘Gee, we don’t have any responsibility. They should make a good faith effort to get this as close to the facts as possible.”

9/11 Commissioner Tom Kean:

“I don’t think the facts are clear, whether it’s Sandy Berger, or whether it’s the head of the CIA, whether a line went dead. I think there are, I think there are a number of — they chose to portray it this way, but my memory of it is that it could have happened any number of ways.”

And here's something that might interest conservatives:

Conservative Author Richard Miniter: ‘There’s Zero Factual Basis’ For Key Scene In Path To 9/11

Today on CNN’s Situation Room, Richard Miniter — conservative author of “Losing bin Laden: How Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror” — confirmed that scenes in ABC’s Path to 9/11 are based on “Internet myth.”

Miniter singled out a key scene in the film involving former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger as having “zero factual basis”: “If people wanted to be critical of the Clinton years there’s things they could have said, but the idea that someone had bin Laden in his sights in 1998 or any other time and Sandy Berger refused to pull the trigger, there’s zero factual basis for that.”


FBI Agent Who Consulted On Path to 9/11 Quit Halfway Through Because ‘They Were Making Things Up’

James Bamford, an author and journalist who has written about security issues, appeared on MSNBC to discuss “The Path to 9/11.” Bamford revealed that an FBI agent who worked as a consultant to the film quit halfway through production of the mini-series because he believed the writers and producers were “making things up.”

Top Bush Counterterrorism Official: ABC’s Path to 9/11 Is ‘Shameful,’ ‘Straight Out of Disney and Fantasyland’

Last night on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, Roger Cressey — a top counterterrorism official to Bush II and Clinton — blasted ABC’s docudrama “The Path to 9/11.” Cressy said “it’s amazing…how much they’ve gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong” and “then they got the big stuff wrong.” He added that a scene where the Clinton administration passes on a surefire opportunity to take out bin Laden is “something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It’s factually wrong. And that’s shameful.”

 

[Rich]

And just one more because I couldn't get this to fit:

1. Contrary to the movie, no US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and saw bin Laden.

2. Contrary to the movie, the head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was no where near the alleged bin Laden camp and did not see BL.

3. Contrary to the movie, the CIA Director actually said that he could not recommend a strike on the camp because the information was single sourced and we would have no way to know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit it.

In short, this scene — which makes the incendiary claim that the Clinton administration passed on a surefire chance to kill or catch bin Laden — never happened. It was completely made up by Nowrasteh.

The actual history is quite different. According to the 9/11 Commission Report (pg. 199), then-CIA Director George Tenet had the authority from President Clinton to kill Bin Laden. Roger Cressy, former NSC director for counterterrorism, has written, “Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and al-Qaeda.”

 

[Larry]

LOL, trust me when I say that I always (it DOES seem eternal sometimes!) try to be working on things I can't talk about. I/we have a lot of hope for something that should start happening within the next year, sooner if the right investor(s) come through.

Confirmed today XM sponsoring Danica Patrick and Drag racing talk day is Tuesday on xm 143. Allan Reinhart segment on that day.
Capps on today looking at a guest shot at IROC in the future and he and Seltzi shot footage for Driving Force in a get this " Hooters ".

 

[Mike]

Laryy, better read this



http://www.adelphia.net/news/read.php?id=13084238&ps=10...HOME_SHNWC01L2_UNEWS

 

[Mike]

Rich Smith, I'm still waiting for you to name one that isnt a lying thief

 

[willy]

And just one more because I couldn't get this to fit:

1. Contrary to the movie, no US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and saw bin Laden.

2. Contrary to the movie, the head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was no where near the alleged bin Laden camp and did not see BL.

3. Contrary to the movie, the CIA Director actually said that he could not recommend a strike on the camp because the information was single sourced and we would have no way to know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit it.

In short, this scene — which makes the incendiary claim that the Clinton administration passed on a surefire chance to kill or catch bin Laden — never happened. It was completely made up by Nowrasteh.

The actual history is quite different. According to the 9/11 Commission Report (pg. 199), then-CIA Director George Tenet had the authority from President Clinton to kill Bin Laden. Roger Cressy, former NSC director for counterterrorism, has written, “Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and al-Qaeda.”

That just cracks me up. I can't believe they couldn't find him..when he granted..and gave ..an interview to ABC. What a complete and utter clusterfargin..on both sides I might add.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Ron Dunlap, neither party leaves much to chose from do they?

No, they don't. People who know me know that I closely equate our levels of freedom with our income tax levels. Lower is capitalism, higher is socialism. Like I said, I waited for years thinking "If only they could get all three branches." Again, like I also said, they didn't even stand up and tout and run on their own successes last time around.

As much as I dislike insulting, the Republicans are a bunch of pu**ies. I wouldn't have said that on the old mater from behind a screen name. I'll only do that if my name IS attached to it. I hope that ten years from now I'm heading some corporation ( hopefully my own ) and someone digs this up and it comes back on me, because it's what I honestly think (knowing how I really mean that, that there are more cowards or fiscal liberals in that party than I ever would have thought).

The only option I have left is to raise a few billion someday and go take over my own country somewhere. Cuba would be nice because you'd instantly have the U.S. buying sugar and tobacco.

 

[mick]

what's really pathetic is how many people watched this show and are
unable to ask themselves, 'how much of this is contrived for entertainment'.
they watch it as if it were the 'news' (as if the TV news is any more believable),
coming away from show thinking our gov't. is run by a bunch of boobs.
typical liberal media - i'm sure our enemies loved this show.

how about a show explaining the millenia old conflict between the
shias and the sunnis, why this conflict may never allow a democratic
Iraq, the extreme factions of Islam and their struggle
for power in the middle east and beyond.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Well, what percentage of us listen to the news and KNOW that it's been "dramatized"?

I was just listening to the comedian, Jimmy Tingle, on XM today saying how he disagreed with Iraq based on "humanitarian reasons." Take what's on this page multiplied by how many hundreds of thousands or millions of people for thirty years, and I've got all the "humanitarian reasons" that I need.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/6086

I found his e-mail address and sent him that link and asking him the same question, if he doesn't think the best "humanitarian reasons" will have been served.

 

[Larry]

Again not in violation of edit just commenting on a TV Docudrama .
I see one side got its way and a reduction in smear while the other stood on its laurels and took the shot on the chin!

Thanks ABC anyway for trying to portray events doling out equal poxes on both houses which is exactly their due.

Well thats not entirely correct as one party had 8 years and the other 8 months so to be equil they would need a larger dumptruck!

 

[Rich]

Perhaps. But the truth is that the Clinton administration did indeed have a solid record in combatting the threat of terrorism:

The Clinton administration sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.

Sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.

Sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA. When Republicans couldn't prevent executive action, President Clinton:

Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Boston airport.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge.

Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania.

Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).

Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.

Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after they had left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.

Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.

Tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism.

Detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries

Created a national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.

Robert Oakley, Reagan Counterterrorism Czar says of Clinton's efforts "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama"

Paul Bremer, Bush's Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley saying he believed the Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden. "

Barton Gellman of the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort."

 

[Rich]

Of course conservatives don't like to discuss the accomplishments of the Clinton administration in this regard because it stands out in contrast with that of the Bush administration:

Here, in stark contrast, is part of the Bush-Cheney anti-terrorism record before September 11, 2001:

Backed off Clinton administration's anti-terrorism efforts.

Shelved the Hart-Rudman report.

Appointed new anti-terrorism task force under Dick Cheney. Group did not even meet before 9/11.

Called for cuts in anti-terrorism efforts by the Department of Defense.

Gave no priority to anti-terrorism efforts by Justice Department.

Ignored warnings from Sandy Berger, Louis Freeh, George Tennant, Paul Bremer, and Richard Clarke about the urgency of terrorist threats.

Halted Predator drone tracking of Osama bin Laden.

Did nothing in wake of August 6 C.I.A. report to president saying Al Qaeda attack by hijack of an airliner almost certain.

Bush - knowing about the terrorists' plans to attack in America, warned that terrorists were in flight schools in the US - took a four week vacation.

By failing to order any coordination of intelligence data, missed opportunity to stop the 9/11 plot as Clinton-Gore had stopped the millennium plots.

 

[D]

Republicans didn't call it censorship when they put pressure on CBS to pull the mini-series about Ronald Reagan a few years back. And just as conservatives back then complained about the Reagan movie, one of the problems with this so-called ABC "docu-drama" is that it is not only revisionist history, but it actually portrays events that never happened and deliberately distorts and/or lies about events that did. Indeed, members of the 9/11 Commission have stated that the movie is not accurate - as do many of the people who are portrayed in the film. The entire thing has actually proven itself to be little more than a conservative "blame Clinton" hit piece.

You might also want to recall that it was the first President Bush, not Clinton, that got the US involved in Mogadishu. Clinton merely inherited that mess, and like Ronald Reagan did in regard to Beruit in '82, withdrew our troops following a military disaster. You might want to remember, too, that the attack on the USS Cole took place on October 12th, 2000, less than a month before the presidential election. When Clinton had previously ordered attacks on Saddam in Iraq, Osama in Afghanistan, and elsewhere, Republicans accused him of "wagging the dog." Had he ordered an attack in response to the attack on the USS Cole despite that fall's election campaign, he would have again been accused of an "October surprise" in an effort to affect the election. The question to ask is not why Clinton didn't respond to the Cole bombing in the three months he remained in office following the attack, but why the Bush administration did nothing about the Cole in the nine months prior to the attack of 9/11.

Ding Ding, we have a winner. Turn of the TV infotainment and go get some real information.

S/F
D

 

[D]

Does anyone else ever wonder if both sides are playing divide and conquer? Each side seems more and more to be catering to the few of each party, leaving the rest of us to pick up the tab. I just take comfort in the fact that their power is transitory: God gets the final say.

I often think that. But the American public is too busy watching "reality TV and Fox news to press the politicians to focus on the issues that really affect their lives and not the hot button issue pandering.

S/F
D

 

[D]

The only option I have left is to raise a few billion someday and go take over my own country somewhere. Cuba would be nice because you'd instantly have the U.S. buying sugar and tobacco.

Viva La Revolucion! the weather is nice there too.

D

 

[D]

how about a show explaining the millenia old conflict between the
shias and the sunnis, why this conflict may never allow a democratic
Iraq, the extreme factions of Islam and their struggle
for power in the middle east and beyond.

Oh come on, people have Survivor to worry about and Dancing With The Stars to watch, why should the be bothered with what's going on in the world or how the past is driving the present.

D